computer_mouse_up

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description bears full responsibility for behavioral disclosure. It only states the basic action and omits important behavior such as whether specifying x/y first moves the cursor, whether a release is a no-op if no button is held, and what the default button behavior is beyond what the schema already states.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single concise sentence with no fluff or redundancy. It is appropriately brief, though it sacrifices useful context for brevity.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a low-level mouse action with optional coordinates and an output schema, the description is too sparse. An agent cannot tell whether coordinates cause a cursor move before release, how the tool behaves relative to mouse-down state, or which button is acted upon by default without opening the schema.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so all three parameters (x, y, button) are already documented. The description adds no additional parameter meaning, which is acceptable under the baseline for fully covered schemas.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description uses a specific verb ('release') and resource ('mouse button'), making the core action clear and disambiguating the tool from a literal 'move mouse up' interpretation. However, it does not explicitly differentiate from related siblings like computer_mouse_down or computer_click beyond the verb itself.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description gives no guidance on when to use this tool versus alternatives. It does not mention that it pairs with computer_mouse_down, nor does it explain when a click, double-click, or drag would be more appropriate.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.